CREATE ACCOUNT

FORGOT YOUR DETAILS?

PakistanCriminalRecords.com is a free research resource being provided free of charge by managed by Background Check Pvt Ltd, one of the Asia's largest screening firms, to public for the awareness about the serious and organized crime in Pakistan.

Rawalpindi: Ephedrine case: Approvers turned accused

Rawalpindi: Ephedrine case: Approvers turned accused

RAWALPINDI: A recentchallan submitted to the controlof narcoticssubstances (CNS) court by the antinarcoticsforce (ANF) in ephedrinescam has raised some legal questions, as the ANF is still treating the approvers as accused persons in the challan. According to the ANF’sfourthchallan in the ephedrinecase, there are 17accused persons including the two approvers, DrRashidJuma, the former director general health, and RizwanAhmedKhan, former director of the Danaspharmaceuticalcompany, who obtained 2,500 kgephedrinequota. Initially named as accused, DrJuma and RizwanKhan turned approvers in July this year and alleged the involvement of Makhdoom Shahab, federal minister for textile industries, AliMusaGilani, son of former primeministerSyedYousaf Raza Gillani, and the federal secretary Khushnood Lashari.

Legal experts say that under section173 of the criminalprocedurecode (CrPC), the names of approvers should be mentioned in column 6 of the report (challan), which is reserved for the witnesses but the ANF included their names in column 4 of the challan, which is for an accused on bail.

AbdulRashidSheikh, counsel for Makhdoom Shahab, told Dawn that in order to keep the approvers under pressure, the ANF deliberately mentioned the names of Dr Juma and RizwanKhan as accused persons.

“Dr Juma and RizwanKhan did not obtain bail and had withdrawn their petitions seeking pre–arrestbail,” the counsel said, objecting to the inclusion of both the approvers in the accused persons’ column.

According to section337 of CrPC under which they had been declared approvers, both persons had been pardoned and, therefore, they must be treated as witnesses, he added. “The ANF in order to blackmail the approvers is not treating them as witnesses and their names are still stated along with the other accused persons of the case,” he alleged.

He claimed that the approvers in the ephedrinecase had recorded their statements under fear and the ANF believes that they would backtrack from their earlier stance, if they would be set free, adding that, in order to keep them under continuous pressure, their names had been put among the accused persons.

According to advocate Sheikh, the recent challan was full of errors as it also mentioned Makhdoom Shahab and MusaGilani as absconders whereas both of them are on bail.

AdvocateFaisalHussain, counsel for MusaGilani, when contacted said that it shows the mala fide intentions of the ANF in this case. After the court declared Dr Juma and RizwanKhan as approver, the force should not have cited them as accused persons, he said.

“The ANF is also pressurising the other accused and trying to plant false stories against the relatives of the accused persons as well,” he alleged.

AkhtarAbbas director legalANF on the other hand insisted that the force’s investigations into the ephedrinecase were in accordance with the directions of the apexcourt.

“Dr Juma and RizwanKhan, although declared as approvers, still have to record their statements under oath before the trial court judge, which would be subject to cross examination by the defence counsel,” he told Dawn.

He, however, admitted that both the approvers had withdrawn their pre-arrest bail petitions but the recent challan mentioned them as accused on bail.

“In fact, Dr Juma and RizwanKhan both were on interim bail at the time when they recorded their statement and, therefore, they have been mentioned as accused persons on bail,” he said.

He rejected allegations that the ANF was spreading false information against the relatives of high profile accused as attempts at defaming the ANF.